![]() In the study, Morse and Wispelwey sought to compare the historical frequency with which black, Latino, and white heart-failure patients admitted to Brigham and Women’s emergency room have been referred to the hospital’s specialty cardiology service, rather than to the general medicine service. It is important to understand the reasons why.īrigham and Women launched this pilot program in response to a 2019 study by Morse and Wispelwey, which appeared in the journal Circulation: Heart Failure and which claimed to demonstrate “the presence of structural racism in admission service for heart failure patients.” Their paper now drives much of the “anti-racism” work being pursued at medical institutions nationwide. It was conducted by Morse and Wispelwey and has been widely celebrated but, it seems, never closely examined. The faulty research being used to justify the program is worth scrutinizing, however. Physicians who are required to use electronic health records in their daily work receive countless distracting notifications. While a scheme to automate prompts based on the racial identity of patients might seem offensive or simply annoying, it may not be especially harmful in itself. The notice does not restrict clinicians’ individual judgment and decision-making in consideration of the best interests of the patient.” According to the website, “The prompt will educate the clinician about the fact that, historically, this population has had inequitable access to specialized cardiology care and offer a recommendation to consider changing admission to the cardiology service. (Bear with us the program itself is a bit boring.) When doctors at Brigham and Women’s refer black or Latino heart-failure patients to the hospital’s general medical service, rather than to the hospital’s specialty cardiology wing, they will be automatically prompted to reconsider that decision. What are these race-explicit programs being championed by Morse and Wispelwey, both of whom hold prestigious positions at a Harvard-affiliated teaching hospital? And why did a handful of low-key demonstrators-there appeared to be fewer than two dozen in all-inspire so much outrage?īrigham and Women’s website features a pilot initiative to address racial “disparities in heart failure admissions.” The project, which is part of a broader United Against Racism campaign being promoted by the Massachusetts General hospital system, does not appear especially dramatic. Still, the reaction seemed outsized: Over 800 doctors and dozens of medical groups signed an open letter expressing solidarity with Morse and Wispelwey, and the New England Journal of Medicine(NEJM) published an opinion piece by three Chicago-based researchers that condemned the picketers-at least one of whom was traced to a white-supremacist group-while praising Morse and Wispelwey’s push for “race-explicit programs directly address the underlying causes of racial health inequities and mitigate the current impact of racism in medicine.” Morse and Wispelwey both hold prominent positions there among other things, Morse is also the first-ever chief medical officer for New York City’s health department. This in part explained by the prestige of Brigham and Women’s, a teaching hospital affiliated with Harvard Medical School. The small and relatively benign demonstration attracted a surprising amount of attention. Michelle Morse and Bram Wispelwey to, as the protesters put it, establish “preferential health care treatment policies for non-White patients.” In late January, protesters picketed the facility to denounce efforts by Drs. ![]() Something strange is happening at Boston’s Brigham and Women’s hospital. The Real Meaning of the Anti-Antiracism Protest at Brigham and Women’s Hospital
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |